Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing!

I don’t really wanna let fascists take words away from me, and I’m definitely not gonna start identifying as a liberal. I recently learned that the US right think “leftist” is a slur for Democrats and, while I don’t want to be associated with Democrats, I’m again not gonna let them take words from me. I’m just gonna let them be wrong

If “extremely liberal” becomes synonymous with “the far left,” I guess I’ll change my mind, but currently if I tell a Democrat that I’m a liberal, they think we’re on the same team

Pretty sure liberalism is still a reformist ideology even in eastern Europe, no?

Is this honestly your first exposure to a leftist condemning liberalism?

I wore Braveheart-inspired facepaint for a football game once as a kid when I lived in Germany, except it was yellow instead of blue to match my team color.

Another player asked what/who I was supposed to look like, and I said “Braveheart”, but obviously this 11yo girl had not seen Braveheart- the only Brave Heart she knew was from the Care Bears

I got made fun of a lot that day lol

I was curious…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d7rzRFSiPw&t=66

Sorry to butt in but I figured I should start identifying the logical fallacies I’ve been referencing.

So you agree that Democrats have not consistently gotten worse on every issue then? And therefore both evils are not getting more evil over time?

This is an invalid inference. Dems aren’t getting worse on every issue ≠ Dems aren’t getting more evil over time

You don’t get to disagree with logic. This is very basic propositional logic. I’m not trying to be pretentious- you’re just genuinely struggling with logic… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_inference

I don’t think I can make this point more clearly, but you’re arguing from a narrow consequentialist, pragmatic perspective, with the assumption that it is objectively true or the default position, but it is not.

You behave as if the broad swaths of legitimate philosophic, political, and moral critique of your perspective simply don’t exist. This leads me to believe that you haven’t come to your conclusions through any actual reasoning, despite your attitude about it.

If you value harming less people, how is the “right” choice not the one that harms less people?.. Long term consequences such as what a worse administration could do for 4 years?.. There is a long term impact to letting the greater evil win. How are Republicans better in the long term?.. I think if your “principles” include less bad things happening, they wouldn’t prevent you from choosing the less bad outcome.

Others have explained this part to you and I think it would be a waste of everyone’s time for me to bother restating the same answers in my own words

Personally, I don’t think choosing the lesser evil is “supporting fascism,” because it directly serves to keep the more fascist party out of office.

“supporting the less fascist option” = “supporting fascism”. You’re playing semantic games to avoid believing/saying that you’re supporting fascism. There is no “voting against” only “voting for” (in this context, obviously- for the presidential race)

Is less suffering, even in the short term, not worth choosing the fascist that hurts less people?

I personally don’t think so. It’s a valid argument, but I don’t believe there is a “right” or “wrong” with this. I enjoy these kinds of discussions as thought experiments, but there’s a time & place for it (and this thread isn’t it, imo)

if both options are fascist, then your only options in the system are “supporting fascists.”

in the capacity of an election choosing the lesser evil is the pragmatic choice… I’d love to have better people to vote for, but right now it’s D and R.

D & R aren’t the only options though. Yes, they’re (probably) the only outcomes regardless of choice, but abstaining and voting third party are both valid options. I understand you disagree- from what I understand, your primary(/only?) concern is the direct/immediate outcome- but, like I said before, this part is a matter of perspective. Other people, like myself, prioritize long-term consequences, principles, etc. over immediate consequences.

please share your long term harm reduction plans

I’ve already seen others explain this to you, so I don’t think it will do any good for me to repeat it in my own words.

Paying taxes to a fascist administration is supporting fascism. I don’t blame people for paying taxes because they feel it’s their “only option”, but it’s dishonest to try to absolve yourself of culpability with semantics.

Similarly:

1. A Democratic administration would have resulted in much less suffering

2. Voting for Democrats supports fascism

It’s important to note, however, that a more accurate statement for #1 is “A Democratic administration would have resulted in much less suffering [in the short term]”

I didn’t say it did ☺ two things can be true

How many marginalized lives have you made worse today?

The irony here is incredible lmao

I don’t think that’s been demonstrated.

You continue to demonstrate it

Voting for dems is literally supporting them. Arguing in their favor is very much defending them.

You’d benefit to realize that your ethical framework is not the default. Additionally, you are blatantly implementing your own framework (consequentialism) extremely narrowly.

A consequentialist (like yourself) could just as easily argue that lesser-evilism has greater long term consequences that render the short term relief irrelevant.

Consequentialism is not the end all be all of ethics. In fact, it can very easily be used to justify genocide. While you are indirectly doing this, I mean much more blatantly (e.g., “suffering is bad, so we should sterilize everyone to end the human race and therefore end suffering”).

A deontological framework argues that by “pulling the lever” you are now responsible for killing someone, whereas by abstaining you are not responsible (but those aren’t the only options in the real life political scenario, to be clear). I understand that your ethical framework suggests that abstaining makes one complicit in the greater consequences, but this is a perspective (opinion) and not a fact. And again, this perspective ignores the broader consequences down the road that come from lesser-evilism

You’re arguing from a consequentialist ethical framework as if it’s the default, while also failing to see the broader consequences of “lesser-evilism”

Not pulling the lever is a valid option even from a consequentialist perspective (as well as, of course, from a deontological perspective or a virtue ethics perspective).

The trolley problem, as a thought experiment, does not exist to justify consequentialism, but to distinguish it from other ethical frameworks.

You are more than defending the Democrats- you’re actively supporting them. Your comments demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of both ethics and logic, and you’re looking at the problem from an extremely narrow perspective.

Just read through the comments- lmao, YDM. Fascist apologia def seems to fit rule 1 of both the instance and community

Side note: What do you think “shitlib” means?

Edit:

Words OP doesn’t know the meaning of:

• shitlib
• defend
• support
• apologia
• logic
• consequentialism
• semantics
• option

Lol

Well, no- this part isn’t about opinion. You’re just wrong about this part. Agree to disagree on the rest though, sure

I… assume their inner world is that of a child’s.

if someone never makes it past their teens…

Consuming media designed for a younger audience does not inherently mean these things, and in fact likely only ever very rarely does

This perspective is so foreign to me. It’s a valid opinion ofc, which I can respect, but I don’t respect the overt judgement- it’s the needless shitting on people that I think is a problem, and it honestly comes across as insecure and, ironically, a little immature.

In my clinical experience as a therapist, it’s often actually an indication of health for adults to partake in such things.

You talk like your perspective is the natural default, but I think it’s not, and I think this says a lot more about you than it does others.